EDITORIAL: Questions need answering from groups seeking county funds

Published: Friday, December 14, 2012 at 12:43 PM.

Of course, there are also many questions for commissioners themselves:

--How do these plans fit into the overall scheme of capital investment for the county?

--If these projects are approved, what projects will be delayed or even killed?

--What kind of transparency can the county require of these three groups -- perhaps in the form of answers to the questions we have posed and those posed by others -- to increase public confidence that investment, or lack of investment is the appropriate course of action?

These requests total almost $2 million -- hardly chump change even for our county's government.

We urge commissioners to make sure the public as a full and complete understanding of what requests are accepted or denied before taking action.

There were three major presentations to county commissioners earlier this week.

All were asking for considerable sums of money and all come with lots of questions.

"Lots of questions" shouldn't be construed in the most cynical way -- questions aren't necessarily bad. Sometimes, the answers can help illuminate a project's purpose and increase confidence in its implementation.

It's also interesting to see where each of these three projects exist in terms of their evolution and the county's support of the project.

We have one project -- the Patrick Senior Center, which is actually a completely mature project, looking to enter a new phase.

We have another project -- the Earl Scruggs Center -- is a project in advanced stages, but not yet complete.

And then the third project -- the new Pinnacle Charter School -- is in early stages of development, trying to secure land and capital funds to get off the ground.

It is through that, and many other lenses, these projects should be viewed. For the senior center, commissioners have supported the project in the past -- is a next phase appropriate? For the Scruggs Center, the county has been an intimate partner with regards to the use of the old courthouse and funding support -- is turning back now an option? And with the charter school -- perhaps the most questions, not because of anything other than the relative infancy of the project.

As you'd might expect, we have some thoughts, listed her in the form of questions:

Let's start with the Patrick Senior Center, which is asking for $300,000

--The professional fundraiser who presented to the county talked about the aging of the baby boomers as a reason for expansion. What is the current usage rate for the senior center? How often is it currently at or over capacity.

--Of the needs listed -- lockers for seniors, nutrition offices, storage, multi-purpose room -- how many are dire needs? What happens if they are not added?

--How does the Patrick Center partner with the senior center in Shelby? Are there possible efficiencies?

Now, the Scruggs Center, which is asking for a $1.3 million loan

-- Of the almost $6 million that has been raised, how much of that was from private sources?

-- What is the plan for paying for the yearly operational costs of the museum?

-- What sort of profit (or loss) is expected in the first year's of the museum's operations?

-- What sort of guarantee would taxpayers have that the loan will be repaid?

And finally, the new charter school, which is asking for $325,000

-- The case is being made that this will draw students who are leaving for out-of-county charter schools back into the county -- what if it doesn't work that way and it increases the defections from the local school system?

--Recently, we have noticed the charter school being referred to as a "college prep" charter school. Some might interpret that to mean the school is targeting more affluent students. How does that address the county's "closing the gap" efforts aimed at helping improve education for minority and lower-income students? What steps is the new school taking to assure equal or even overrepresentation of disadvantaged children?

Of course, there are also many questions for commissioners themselves:

--How do these plans fit into the overall scheme of capital investment for the county?

--If these projects are approved, what projects will be delayed or even killed?

--What kind of transparency can the county require of these three groups -- perhaps in the form of answers to the questions we have posed and those posed by others -- to increase public confidence that investment, or lack of investment is the appropriate course of action?

These requests total almost $2 million -- hardly chump change even for our county's government.

We urge commissioners to make sure the public as a full and complete understanding of what requests are accepted or denied before taking action.